Communion: Whom would I have over for dinner?

I'm sitting here processing various scribbled notes from recent weeks.  I ran across one that said, "Communion:  Who would I have in the house?" 

It was an idea for a rough rule of thumb.  The idea was that I could regard myself as "in communion" with anyone I'd be willing to have over for dinner in my home, and who would in turn be willing to dine civilly with me and my family.  The latter criterion would include the guest at least listening respectfully to the blessing we say.

Of course there'd have to be limits.  For example, I doubt you'd find me inviting a completely unrepentant criminal to my home.  And my family's safety would always be pretty much a trump-card issue.

But short of that, I imagine just about any person who behaved more or less decently would be welcome.  My wife would never tolerate any lesser degree of hospitality.  (Certainly I'd never exclude someone from my table solely because his theological beliefs happened not to match my own.)

I can think of worse ways of defining whom we as a church are "in communion" with, and with whom we should be willing to share the Eucharist, which is first and foremost a community meal.

In fact, I seem to recall that theologian John Dominic Crossan stresses Jesus' open table fellowship in some of his writings.  If it was good enough for Jesus ....

Comments

[Barry Fernelius]

Based on the Gospel writings, Jesus dined with a wider cross-section of society than I typically do, including all kinds of sinners such as tax collectors and prostitutes.

I don't think that the point is "Who would I have over for dinner?" Instead, the point is, "With whom would Jesus have dinner?" This is a much more challenging standard.